送交者: apate 于 2005-1-13, 15:53:26:
回答: 没有吃过孩子的人，或者还有？-- 读汪永晨有感 由 Enlighten 于 2005-1-13, 15:37:11:
as i said earlier, some environmentalists like Aldo Leopold have argued for the expansion of ethics to the scale of not only human-human, human-society, but also human-nature. Leopold calls his "the land ethics" which has become one of the most influential tradition of environmentalism. following his logic, one can certainly argue that the principles of justice and rights should extend to the natural world. (Peter Singer maybe a good place to start reading about such issues, since he advocates for animal ethics. but i don't know much detail about his theses.)
but such ethical extension encounters practical problems. insofar as rights come hand in hand with moral obligations, what would a near-distinctive animal's moral olgligations be while it enjoys the protection of natural rights? does it have a moral obligation to be injected with tubes and nano-machines in experimental tests? would it protest if it felt being mis-treated?